Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolven
No. I read it as the opposite. They would make the rezoning more planful so that they can work with the communities to get density while still having diversity in housing options.
"Fix Blanket Rezoning. Find a middle ground solution that supports growth and respects community input, while creating more homes where they’re needed most. This includes a full zoning review to ensure diverse housing forms are built fairly across the city."
Also, I would hope that instead of having the people turn on each other (like how you want to go after upper mount royal) the focus, in my opinion, should be getting housing density out of corporate owned lands. Houses are the most expensive asset most people own and we should be mindful of that while trying to accomplish the goals of making more housing.
|
I mean, the whole benefit of the blanket re-zoning is that there isn't a bunch of bureaucracy and consultations required. Those things sound really motherhood and apple pie but they add a lot of time and cost to the development process, which will absolutely reduce supply/increase costs to homebuyers.
There is tons of land in places like Upper Mount Royal right near transportation corridors (14th st) that it would be 100% reasonable to upzone. There isn't any justifiable reason for wealthy neighbourhoods to be exempt from these changes. That isn't an us-versus-them situation, it's trying to maximize the value we get as a society from the resources we have.